https://www.polity.org.za
Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
Home / Case Law / High Courts RSS ← Back
Defence|Projects
Defence|Projects
defence|projects
Close

Email this article

separate emails by commas, maximum limit of 4 addresses

Sponsored by

Close

Embed Video

Tallman v MV "Shark Team" and Others (AC 40/2009) [2014] ZAWCHC 202

Tallman v MV

6th January 2015

SAVE THIS ARTICLE      EMAIL THIS ARTICLE

Font size: -+

  • Tallman v MV "Shark Team" and Others (AC 40/2009) [2014] ZAWCHC 202
    Download
    0.56 MB
Sponsored by

Introduction


1. At about 07h30 on Sunday 13 April 2008 a shark-cage diving vessel, “Shark Team”, set out from Kleinbaai (near Gansbaai), taking a party of ten tourists to sea on a shark viewing expedition.  A little over 2 hours after departure, while the vessel was at anchor with a videographer in the shark cage attached to its side, it was struck by a large wave which caused it to capsize. Three of the tourists on board drowned. One of those tourists was the plaintiff’s husband, Christopher Matthew Tallman (“Tallman”).

Advertisement

2. The plaintiff instituted an action in rem against the vessel, and an action in personam against both the skipper of Shark Team that day, Mr Grant Tuckett (“Tuckett”) and the owner of the vessel, White Shark Projects CC (“the owner” or “the CC” ).

3. The quantum of the plaintiff’s claim, if she succeeds on the merits is, by agreement and in terms of an order previously made, to be held over for later determination.  The issues to be determined at the trial were the following:

Advertisement

a. Whether Tallman was married to the plaintiff;

b. Whether Tallman’s death was caused by negligence on the part of the defendants (or any of them);

c. Whether an indemnity signed by Tallman absolves the defendants (or any of them) from liability; and

d. Whether the first and third defendants are entitled to limit their liability on the basis of section 261 of the Merchant Shipping Act, No 57 1951

4. Well into the course of the trial the first question referred to above was admitted.  No submissions were ultimately made on behalf of the defendants in respect of the possible defence raised by the third issue. It follows that the issues which require to be determined are the second and fourth issues listed above, as well as questions related to costs.

EMAIL THIS ARTICLE      SAVE THIS ARTICLE

To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here

Comment Guidelines

About

Polity.org.za is a product of Creamer Media.
www.creamermedia.co.za

Other Creamer Media Products include:
Engineering News
Mining Weekly
Research Channel Africa

Read more

Subscriptions

We offer a variety of subscriptions to our Magazine, Website, PDF Reports and our photo library.

Subscriptions are available via the Creamer Media Store.

View store

Advertise

Advertising on Polity.org.za is an effective way to build and consolidate a company's profile among clients and prospective clients. Email advertising@creamermedia.co.za

View options
Free daily email newsletter Register Now